The historian Arthur Schlesinger, Sr. said that Anti-Catholicism is “the deepest-held bias in the history of the American people”(Gibson, The Coming Catholic Church, HarperCollins 2004). That’s a very strong statement in the face of both our racial biases and our economic and political biases.
You might test your own level of Anti-Catholic bias by your response to the naming of the new pope Francis I yesterday. Check which box fits your response:
____ Totally disinterested. This has nothing to do with me.
____ Very put off by all the pomp and media attention.
____ Visceral distaste for anything Roman Catholic
____ Mildly interesting political/historical event
____ Deeply moved
Many thought anti-Catholicism was dead in American politics after John Kennedy’s election, but wasn’t it interesting how it resurfaced with John Kerry’s run! I also found it tell-tale that popular evangelicals could find their way along the path from cult to Christian for a Mormon presidential candidate, but could not make the same journey for a Catholic candidate.
According to what I have read, Anti-Catholicism came to America from Great Britain with the earliest Protestant settlers who were either religiously at war with the “Whore of Babylon” or the “Anti-Christ,” or they were early conspiratists, fearing a Vatican-controlled world dominance. (During JFK’s run for office, I personally heard both of those strains of anti-Catholicism from our pulpits!)
The 19th century version of Anti-Catholicism derived more from immigration issues. Whereas the United States had been predominantly and pervasively Protestant, waves of Irish Catholics, Polish Catholics, and Italian Catholics began to change the landscape and threaten the national culture in more than just religion. Many Americans do not know that Anti-Catholicism was a core component of the Ku Klux Klan’s identity.
Maybe this is a good time to re-think your own mindset toward Roman Catholics. Even in the very “liberal” circle of our fellowship which is prepared to accept into fellowship anyone who says Jesus is Lord—that’s usually how it is stated—I’ve noticed that they rarely include Roman Catholics in their circle. It’s pretty easy to include all those Christians who sing the same praise songs, have the same kinds of buildings, and who are more likely to fellowship us.
Does anyone doubt that Roman Catholics believe that Jesus is Lord? Our experience in Germany as missionaries was that we had much more in common with the Roman Catholics than we did with the Protestant church. The Catholics believed that Jesus is the Son of God, that He rose from the grave, that He is coming back for His own. They believe the Bible is the Word of God, inspired by the Holy Spirit. Catholics baptize for the forgiveness of sin, take communion every Sunday, and they believe in the power of prayer.
The Protestant Church in Germany does not hold to any of the above! Some in the Protestant Church do—I don’t want to demonize them—but most of the pastors do not believe in the resurrection, and as Paul said, if you don’t believe that then you hope in vain!
Of course, after almost 2000 years of history, the Roman Catholic church has picked up a lot of tradition, a lot of doctrinal diversity, and a lot of human fraility. My brother-in-law, who has become a Catholic priest, says that it is the best of churches and the worst of churches.
Here’s what I know. The Roman Catholic church has had missionaries telling the story of Jesus in every country of the world long before—sometimes centuries before—my church sent anyone! They stand for Jesus, for obedience to the Word, for morality, and for peace in a belligerent world like few Christian churches have done.
I do not believe all they teach or practice; I really do not like it that I am excluded from communion with my brother-in-law. But I will not pretend that the 1.3 billion Catholic believers in the world do not know Christ.
I am praying for the new pope that he will follow Christ and that he will lead his flock nearer to God. That’s my prayer for him and for you as well.
Mark's Blog 
Thank you, Mark. I really enjoyed reading this article. Hope you and Sherrylee are well. We love you guys. –Maurine
I’m just stunned. In due love to my brothers and sisters, it seems like most protestants today are so by taste only and with no knowledge of what the reformation (the “protest”) was all about. I ask this with all sincerity: Have we forgotten?
(I’m going to focus on Rome here and not individual Catholics).
The official teachings of Rome make the Judaizers in Galatia look like amateurs. Rome does not teach the sufficiency of Christ and His atonement. The Pope teaches the Mass is a propitiatory sacrifice that perfects no one. Then there are indulgences (which Rome dogmatically teaches are part of the gospel), the Marian dogmas, purgatory, priestly absolution, etc., all of which are man-made teachings that are not part of the gospel. The gospel of Rome rejects justification by faith in that they combine it with sanctification. Instead of teaching works being a necessary product of justification, they proclaim works as necessary merit for justification (big difference).
As for the Papacy, it developed over time and was based first upon the prominence of the Roman church, not it’s eventual bishop. It is not 2000 years old. Peter was a “fellow elder” and an apostle, not a “pope”. The early Roman church had a plurality of elders, not a monarchical episcopate. And what human person would ever dare to be called “Holy Father” or “Vicar of Christ”? What human person would dare to have others bow to him and kiss his ring?
Read Galatians, Romans, and Hebrews; then read Trent and the doctrines of Rome. Then tell me which doesn’t fit. (btw: according to Trent, I stand condemned). Historically, the Roman Catholic Church is one of the biggest persecutors by which martyrs were made.
I love my friends and family who are Catholics, and I would never stand in judgment over their salvation. However, it is clear that what comes out of the hierarchy in Rome and their official teachings are outside of what is Scriptural and are outside of the gospel. It is enslaving. Being in the Philippines it pained me to watch the abuse of the people by the priests (who won’t even show up unless paid) in the poor villages. It pained me to watch women bow to a statue of Mary in a white gown and put money into a box in front of a statue of baby Jesus. And what of all the icons? The idolatry is rampant.
If there is anything the humble Pope can do it is reject his title, submit himself and Rome to the Scriptures, and preach the all-freeing Word of the gospel of Jesus Christ; who made an all sufficient sacrifice for the salvation of people; needing nothing and nobody else to complete His finished and perfect work. Not a Pope, not a priest, not Mary, not a saint, not Rome, not anybody or anything. Christ alone.
Grace be with you –
[…] * Would You Pray for the New Pope? by Mark Woodward; * Virtual Reality Sistine […]
Of course we should pray for the Pope; if he were to invite me, I would pray with the Pope. It should be remembered that one reason the Catholics were the only ones sending missionaries is that other groups were not allowed to exist. It is far removed from us, but historically for centuries it was a crime to try to be non-catholic.
If YHWH promotes pagan idolaters praying to him/worshipping at the Temple in Zion (1 Kings 8:41-43; endorsed by Jesus, Mark 11:17) it is certainly the case that all monotheists who worship the same God should feel free praying together. Right??
Mark,
I appreciate your words and I echo your sentiments wholeheartedly. This is what I wrote yesterday concerning the new pope. I would be honored with your feedback.
http://jonathanteel.wordpress.com/2013/03/13/honoring-the-pope-hope-and-peace-an-argentine-protestants-view-of-the-papacy/
Jonathan, thank you for your comments, but especially for inviting me to read your blog. You have a very special perspective, so it was interesting to hear the Argentine part of you reacting to the papal choice. And I really appreciated your prayer for the pope. I don’t really believe that Peter was the first pope, so the tree image presented me with a little challenge. I think it is just historically wrong for the Roman Catholics to claim exclusively to be the first Christians if they mean anything more than the right of every Christian to claim membership in the one and only body of Christ.
Again, thanks for your comment. Blessings on you, Mark
Thanks Mark.
I too agree with you that the about the image of the Tree could be a confusing. I used that graphic of the Tree more as an illustration to show how broad Christendom has branched out; should have looked harder for a better graphic. Likewise, I do not believe that Peter was the first pope rather I was attempting to use the current Catholic language; after all it is the Catholic history that is being expressed throughout the world not that of my “faith branch” (churches of Christ)
Blessings,
Jonathan Teel
Excellent article, Mark, and thoughtful as always! I was deeply touched by the joy of Catholic leaders at the naming of Pope Francis – for his love for the poor, warmth toward people, and dedication to the core principles of faith.
Very nice, seemingly humble man. Hard to say anything about him personally or about the vast range of people claiming to follow him as he claims to follow Jesus. Nevertheless there are some pretty profound statements in scripture that have shaped a conception of what is under the surface in Catholicism and are one of the reasons that your brother in law won’t share communion with you.
The Man of Lawlessness (2 Thessalonians 2)
2 Concerning the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ and our being gathered to him, we ask you, brothers and sisters, 2 not to become easily unsettled or alarmed by the teaching allegedly from us—whether by a prophecy or by word of mouth or by letter—asserting that the day of the Lord has already come. 3 Don’t let anyone deceive you in any way, for that day will not come until the rebellion occurs and the man of lawlessness is revealed, the man doomed to destruction. 4 He will oppose and will exalt himself over everything that is called God or is worshiped, so that he sets himself up in God’s temple, proclaiming himself to be God.
5 Don’t you remember that when I was with you I used to tell you these things? 6 And now you know what is holding him back, so that he may be revealed at the proper time. 7 For the secret power of lawlessness is already at work; but the one who now holds it back will continue to do so till he is taken out of the way. 8 And then the lawless one will be revealed, whom the Lord Jesus will overthrow with the breath of his mouth and destroy by the splendor of his coming. 9 The coming of the lawless one will be in accordance with how Satan works. He will use all sorts of displays of power through signs and wonders that serve the lie, 10 and all the ways that wickedness deceives those who are perishing. They perish because they refused to love the truth and so be saved. 11 For this reason God sends them a powerful delusion so that they will believe the lie 12 and so that all will be condemned who have not believed the truth but have delighted in wickedness.
How we understand and apply this text affects whether we will be looking for this man of lawlessness to appear yet in the future, or whether we see his working presently at work in the world. So far I have been inclined to see him at work over the centuries in what has been claimed as Christianity, and has a huge following. I believe that the plea for a return to simple Biblical Christian faith and practice is what prompts us to call our Catholic friends to be set free from the rule of this man. Most were born into Catholicism, many are becoming Catholics. If this text is speaking of the Papacy, then this is an alternative for those who refuse to love the truth. If not, then who is this text speaking of?
[…] Would You Pray for the New Pope? […]